Coronavirus Sars-CoV-2/Covid-19 Megathread

[garbon]

Wedding-themed parties FTW!

My social bubble is this large, officer.

This is an educational event!

It is okay that we have this many staff members crammed together in a small space as we're a business.

[garbon]

That seems pretty clear to me. Social gatherings = no. Non-social gatherings like households, support bubbles, work, education etc still allowed.

A wedding or funeral with over 6 people that is not a social gathering?

[Sheilbh]

That seems pretty clear to me. Social gatherings = no. Non-social gatherings like households, support bubbles, work, education etc still allowed.

A wedding or funeral with over 6 people that is not a social gathering?

Yeah - I mean they've always had separate rules.

I suppose in my head if I don't have to wear a suit = social gathering, if I do = special event

Also I think receptions and wakes are still more or less impossible - and I definitely wouldn't consider the bit at the church/crematorium/registry office a social event.

My social bubble is this large, officer.

This is an educational event!

Yeah there will always be chancers but they're a minority. On this or anything else, we shouldn't be making things more difficult than necessary for the vast majority of people who follow rules just so we can crack down on the chancers.

[garbon]

Yeah - I mean they've always had separate rules.

I suppose in my head if I don't have to wear a suit = social gathering, if I do = special event

So an arbitrary distinction you are drawing.

Yeah there will always be chancers but they're a minority. On this or anything else, we shouldn't be making things more difficult than necessary for the vast majority of people who follow rules just so we can crack down on the chancers.

But isn't that the point of this?

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/sep/08/coronavirus-gatherings-of-more-than-six-to-be-banned-in-england

Under current rules for England, guidelines limit most outdoor gatherings to six people, or no more than two households or household bubbles if people are meeting indoors.

The law allows for a higher limit of 30 people, but this is supposed to only be in place for a community event or a gathering such as a wedding. Up until now the police have had no powers to stop gatherings of up to 30 and ministers believe it has been widely abused.

This will change from Monday to reduce the default maximum to six, making it easier for police to identify and disperse illegal gatherings.

[garbon]

I see you also cropped out my mention of businesses.

[Sheilbh]

I see you also cropped out my mention of businesses.

Yeah - that's kind of different. Businesses have health and safety laws where they have to provide a safe workplace for employees. They could cram people in, like in the old days, but it would take one complaint or one lawsuit to cause issues. But ultimately that's kind of out of our hands - it's up to the business to make it safe.

Edit: Whereas I'm in control if I go to the pub with a big group or not.

So an arbitrary distinction you are drawing.

I think it's something most people would recognise. That going to the pub or seeing friends which you're likely to do every few days is different than weddings and funerals which are less regular events, unless you're Lucrezia Borgia

But isn't that the point of this?

Maybe. I don't think that's chancers though - by that I mean people who know the rules and try to work out clever schemes that get around them (which are never that clever). I think this is because of what Tamas said, no-one knows the rules any more. It's more innocent, people aren't following the rules because they don't know or understand them. Personally I didn't know those rules about gatherings of 30, I didn't think there was any limit you just had to keep your distance etc - so I broke the rules loads over the summer without knowing it

It's starting to spread again, so we're going back to a basic simple message that everyone can understand and follow.

[Tamas]

Government spokesperson in Hungary said contact tracing (which is not being done there) is pointless because it "won't protect you from the virus".


They introduced a blanket ban on foreigners entering the country from 1st of September. Then a few days later they realised the European Super Cup is scheduled to be in Budapest. Football is Orban's big passion so they have altered the rules that foreigners can enter for "commercial reasons" like a football match.

Also the deputy PM's passion is hunting so foreign hunters entering is also "commercial reasons". They are also going ahead with a super-expensive hunting expo and of course you can enter the country for that.

[garbon]

Yeah - that's kind of different. Businesses have health and safety laws where they have to provide a safe workplace for employees. They could cram people in, like in the old days, but it would take one complaint or one lawsuit to cause issues. But ultimately that's kind of out of our hands - it's up to the business to make it safe.

Edit: Whereas I'm in control if I go to the pub with a big group or not.

Is it though? Let's be classist () and look specifically at offices. Any steps that offices can take to provide safe workplaces are just going to be down to what they feel constitutes safety/latest government guidance (which is an ever moving target). How much safety can an office really be accountable for when it comes to a novel pandemic when the official guidelines on what is safety change month to month (if not sooner)?

It isn't lost on me that things the government wants to encourage (like unnecessarily having office workers travel into the office), get exemptions. COVID-19 doesn't really care.

I think it's something most people would recognise. That going to the pub or seeing friends which you're likely to do every few days is different than weddings and funerals which are less regular events, unless you're Lucrezia Borgia

But they are social events. I guess the argument could be that they happen less frequently but they are also events where social distancing is not likely to be followed. So the rule is then social events are not allowed unless they are 'limited and specific'?

Maybe. I don't think that's chancers though - by that I mean people who know the rules and try to work out clever schemes that get around them (which are never that clever). I think this is because of what Tamas said, no-one knows the rules any more. It's more innocent, people aren't following the rules because they don't know or understand them. Personally I didn't know those rules about gatherings of 30, I didn't think there was any limit you just had to keep your distance etc - so I broke the rules loads over the summer without knowing it

It's starting to spread again, so we're going back to a basic simple message that everyone can understand and follow.

But it isn't simple because it a) isn't all that different from what guidance was and b) the exemptions seems to exist more to fit the government's interests rather than guided by actual risk.

By the by, here's what appears to be the full existing government guidance which from a skim it appears most will still be in play even with these new 'changes'.

https://www.gov.uk/guidance/meeting-people-from-outside-your-household-from-4-july

[garbon]

And as I saw B post on social media, if a person in UK decides to visit another part of their country:

[Sheilbh]

Is it though? Let's be classist () and look specifically at offices. Any steps that offices can take to provide safe workplaces are just going to be down to what they feel constitutes safety/latest government guidance (which is an ever moving target). How much safety can an office really be accountable for when it comes to a novel pandemic when the official guidelines on what is safety change month to month (if not sooner)?

It isn't lost on me that things the government wants to encourage (like unnecessarily having office workers travel into the office), get exemptions. COVID-19 doesn't really care.

I agree on it being crazy that the government want people back in offices. As I say we've already seen this happen in France where offices are the number 1 location of transmission.

But I think there's loads of measures that companies are taking. Among my friends I've heard of everywhere operating somewhere between 25-50% capacity, one way systems implemented in offices, some offices temperature scanning people before they let them come in and all the usual stuff - regular deep-cleans, hand sanitiser everywhere, meeting rooms being closed because you can't distance in them etc. And there is guidance for employers on what they need to do to have a safe workplace - that's got nothing to do with the rules on social gatherings.

You know it's not in our control if the employer doesn't clean things enough, doesn't implement measures to allow for distancing etc - that's on them and they're responsible for it. Ultimately it's not really on the employer if once people go back they all decide to book the smallest meeting room and hang out - that's on us.

But they are social events. I guess the argument could be that they happen less frequently but they are also events where social distancing is not likely to be followed. So the rule is then social events are not allowed unless they are 'limited and specific'?

Yes. You could even say social events are not allowed unless they are weddings or funerals which have specific rules and protocols in place

I don't think that's overly complicated - especially compared to this summer when I just lost track of and stopped noticing the different rules.

But it isn't simple because it a) isn't all that different from what guidance was and b) the exemptions seems to exist more to fit the government's interests rather than guided by actual risk.

By the by, here's what appears to be the full existing government guidance which from a skim it appears most will still be in play even with these new 'changes'.

https://www.gov.uk/guidance/meeting-people-from-outside-your-household-from-4-july

Okay I did not follow any of that over the summer (and won't be for the next couple of weeks)

I think we just disagree - it seems pretty clear to me. Maybe it isn't clearer but it's just the messaging is less confused than all those rules existing (which I didn't know about) but please go back to normal. Now it's these rules exist, but go to work

Edit: Incidentally - thing that's freaking me out at the minute is the government's language on testing, which sounds like, after a few months of working, is....not working again

[Tamas]

I wonder if Hancock has a legit point on people asking to be tested because of a potential contact with an infected person. That is a bit excessive. As much as I want to help the collective effort of fighting this crap, I'd need to feel quite bad before I have that needle stabbed up my nose.

[Sheilbh]

I wonder if Hancock has a legit point on people asking to be tested because of a potential contact with an infected person. That is a bit excessive. As much as I want to help the collective effort of fighting this crap, I'd need to feel quite bad before I have that needle stabbed up my nose.

I did the home test and it is quite unpleasant if you follow the instructions and there is a bit of nonsense going on. I know one person who pre-ordered three tests because they were going on holiday to France and wanted to do a test when they got back (so they could break the rules with a relatively clean conscience) which isn't really in the spirit of the moment I think.

But I think at this stage we should have far, far more testing capacity because people taking the piss in September or testing because of potential contact is probably a fraction of the number of people in December who'll need tests because they have symptoms that are similar to covid.

[Tamas]

Good point.

[garbon]

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/live/2020/sep/09/uk-coronavirus-live-matt-hancock-covid-testing-shortage-boris-johnson?page=with:block-5f58f6178f087b90a2990c8d#block-5f58f6178f087b90a2990c8d

Q: For the last few weeks you have been telling people to go back to work. Now you are putting new restrictions in place. Why should people listen to you?

Johnson says the situation has been changing.

He still wants people to return to work, in a Covid-free way.

He now wants to get people to follow the rule of six, he says. This will be legally enforced.

Now we are on to the rule of six!

[garbon]

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/live/2020/sep/09/uk-coronavirus-live-matt-hancock-covid-testing-shortage-boris-johnson?page=with:block-5f58f7fd8f087ba78e10c657#block-5f58f7fd8f087ba78e10c657

Q: Do you accept people will not have a normal Christmas?

Johnson says it is "just too early to say".

He says the government has two big approaches.

It wants to change behaviour from the rule of six.

And it wants to give people passports through its moon shot. It is ambitious, but the government is backing it with all it's got.